Hahahaha you're so fun to make fun of. You bring up the fact that they gave up more yards through the air and the ground when Ryans was out and when I look at those numbers, somehow amazingly I am posting raw #s without context. I didn't even post numbers. What an ass clown. Then you go on to admit that their YPC went down. Well good. So were you lying before? Or just hoping nobody would look too closely? You don't know shit about football. You don't know shit about Demeco Ryans and how his loss affected Philly's D You're pretty damn good at repeating cliches and meaningless statements over and over to try to cover up for your lack of football knowledge. I bet you hate me don't you? How many times does this make it that I have made you look stupid on here?
you bore me but I don't hate you. Hating you would mean I care about you. you only make yourself look stupid w/ your constant bashing of me rather than arguments and making stuff up that you don't understand.
That's great, but there's a lot more to being a quarterback then not fucking up games in January. Playing consistently well is the name of the game, and Mark just didn't do that. He had two nice playoff runs for us. Those were 4 and 5 years ago, now. His overall body of work left a lot to be desired. The guy accounted for more turnovers than touchdowns in his time here. We had two winning seasons with him at the helm and two non-winning ones. Sounds pretty mediocre to me.
of course, if he was consistent he'd be a top guy. He's not and he isn't but he is a guy you know you can win with if you have the right pieces around him. you guys act like he is Kyle Mackey or Geno Smith and that's unfair and you hold him to a standard like he is Peyton Manning. we had 1 losing season with him and we had by far the worst talent around him in the league. He's a winning QB in this league.
Oh but it is so easy to kill your arguments and make fun of you at the same time! It is so very telling that the only part of my post that you responded to was the part that had nothing to do with football Why is that? Could it be...that you......don't know shit about football beyond a First Take level of analysis? Yeah buddy.
See, I think this means a lot more to you than it should. A LOT OF GUYS can win with the "right pieces" around them. I'm simply tired of playing around the quarterback position. I'm tired of having a guy with training wheels on. We need to find a guy who is a strength, not a weakness. Maybe we can win games with a mediocre quarterback on a talented team, but I assure you we can win even more games with an above average quarterback on the same talented team. I'm sorry if we don't want him to lead the league in turnovers. I really don't think that's unfair. And holding him to the standard of Peyton Manning? compared to Peyton Manning, I'm not even sure the guy is a quarterback. Compared to Peyton Manning, the guy might as well be a converted tight end.
but that's the thing many supposed much better QBs w/ more talent around them haven't been able to play as well in postseason. that '09 div rd game tells us all. Rivers the "elite" QB trying to do too much and costing his team the game while the rookie didn't make the big mistake and made a few big plays when he had to. I don't want him to lead the league in TOs but many didn't hurt his team, he got credited w/ a fumble that wasn't his, he had INTs that were good reads and throws bounce of WRs into hands of defenders. some his fault, some not. not as bad as #s suggest.
Somebody's frustrated because they got called out on their bullshit You're mad. I get it. You got your big insecurity about not being able to talk actual in-depth football rubbed in your face so now you're turtling up.
as usual you are wrong, not frustrated at all. I understand this game better than most and clearly better than you. I am not an X's and O's guy. been too long since I played and too long since I rewatched every game a million times. 10 years ago things were different and I had more time. No shame in that, X's and O's are part of the game but not all. I am not one of these guys that pretends to know the playbook, I am not a phony.
That's great, but you have to play well week in and week out to get to the postseason. Also, a lot of those better QBs you mention were asked to do a lot more than Sanchez ever was. Whenever Sanchez is asked to throw a lot, he commits turnovers and his team usually loses. The fact that he played well in a handful of playoff games doesn't change the fact that he's a guy best-suited to hand the ball off and not get in the way. Sorry, but even if I totally agreed with this analysis of that game (I don't), we still can't boil their respective careers down to one game. Rivers is eons ahead of Sanchez as a QB. But again, every QB has these excuses. Some INTS were good reads, some fumbles were bad calls, etc, etc. In a league where every QB has potential excuses for turnovers, Sanchez has been at or near the top of the league in turnovers and turnover ratio in every year except for one. The guy has 80 interceptions and 23 lost fumbles (50 fumbles, overall) in 71 games. This means he averages just under 1.5 turnovers per game for his career. That's just not very good.
better QBs will be more consistent and get there more often w/o a doubt. Rivers is better b/c he has been more consistent but I would never want Philip Rivers QBing my team in a big game. He turns it over a lot.
Even if Rivers really is a bad big game player, you've got to play consistently well to get to those big games. I want a guy who is a balance of the two.
On your first reply, neither has Nacho. He was limited out of team necessity due to his incompetence. Play him up all you want, but you still are a fan boy, not a Jedi in terms of football knowledge. On your second reply, you are the one who proves yourself to be less than average, not me silly boy!! Hahahah Your view of the game is so biased due to your love for a shitty QB! Hahah You think that you see things that people don't due to superior knowledge, when so many times all you do is chase your tail, and deny that you don't know shit about football especially when it comes to below average QB's! On your third reply, I watched the same game you did. Except I see our defense destroy rivers, because our strength that season was defense, and Nacho did contribute by handing the ball off, while our Offensive coordinator got the best of San Diego's defense by setting them up all game, while keeping Nachos responsibility very low. You would know that if you could see outside of Nacho's jock strap, yet you don't!!! You probably never even played football at any other level than Pop Warner from they way you think, then you act like Yoda!!! Hahahaha Nacho held our team back, 4 seasons in a row. Why is it he looks so much better to you, Lone Wolf? Hahaha Because you don't know football anymore than a 6 year old little girl. That's the truth you should admit to, because you prove it so much! I'm not the one who twists stats my friend, that is you. Stats tell more of a story than you will ever know. You just hate them, until they favor you, because they even tell you how bad your "Boy" is. Get real Junc, I highly doubt you can. Did you ever play football for any team? Or did you sit the bench? I bet the latter, truth be told. I doubt you will.
Why do you love Nacho then? He turns it over regardless of the "Big game situation? Do you really believe he is above average, or can win a big game? Please answer, it will tell us all, what you do or don't know!
You have never been unbiased about Nacho! Hahah If so, you wouldn't look like the only football you ever played was on Madden!
Put your Money where your mouth is!!! If he starts, it will be CFL, or Arena. Not NFL! Bet me big boy, please bet me!!
Junk, all Turnovers hurt a team, period, end of story, ask any football person, ask any football coach, ask anyone who's been part of the game. Not all turnovers lead to points, but all Turnovers take potential points off the board, kill drives, put more stress on the defense. There is no such thing as a positive or neutral turnover, it doesn't exist. Any time you turn the ball over you're taking away a chance for your team to score and giving the other team an additional chance to score. In hindsight after the game you can say 'this turnover didn't hurt us' or 'this turnover was a killer'. But when the game is in progress you don't know what the outcome of the drive would have been without the turnover and you don't know if the other team is going to score as a result of the turnover. You talk a lot about looking at box scores and deriding people for doing that, but Junc when you say 'this turnover didn't hurt because the other team didn't score' you are just looking at box scores and not how it effect the game in the moment and in the context of the moment. You're a faux intellectual when it comes to football.
